6 RCNY §5-300 defines a candidate for employment as a person who has applied for a specific employment position by submitting the required information/items. It defines screening as determining whether a candidate or employee should be selected or advanced. A sourcing tool should therefore be analyzed by what it actually does and when in the workflow it acts.
Workflow distinction
| Stage | Typical question | LL144 relevance |
|---|---|---|
| Broad sourcing | Who might be interesting to contact? | May fall outside candidate screening depending on facts. |
| Application intake | Has a person applied to a specific role? | Candidate definition becomes directly relevant. |
| Screening/ranking | Who advances or is classified/ranked for the role? | Core LL144 screening analysis. |
| Promotion assessment | Which employee advances in a promotion process? | Expressly within employment-decision definition when other elements are met. |
Product labels are not enough
A vendor may call a feature sourcing, matching, recommendation or ranking. Scope should be determined by the actual computational process, output and use in the employment workflow rather than the marketing label.
Frequently asked questions
No. The statutory and rule definitions must be satisfied, including covered computational process, simplified output, substantial assistance/replacement and an employment decision.
Yes. The same platform can contain multiple features or workflows. Scope should be mapped at the feature/output/use level.
The rule's simplified-output definition expressly distinguishes tools that only translate or transcribe existing text from covered predictions/classifications. Actual functionality still matters.
Next step
Use this page for general information only. For a specific workflow, review the LL144 scope framework or request an independent bias-audit scope review.